Revelation between Remembering and Forgetting

It is 13 years since one of the iconic Imams of Cape Town passed away. Imam Bassier was an Imam in the Bo-Kaap who had touched the lives of many people in his mosque and neighorhood. Moreover, he was a frequent visitor to the Robben Island, and offered a word of solace to those incarcerated there for many years. He was designated as the Muslim chaplain, but did not limit his concern to his particular flock (or Mureeds as would be called in Cape Town).

When reminded about his death anniversary, I asked his son to share with me the chapters of the Qur'an to which he was attached. I have become aware of this personal feature of the Qur'an in the lives of Muslims. Recently, Ebrahim Rasool mentioned that he was fond of reading Surah Zumar when he was in prison during the 1980s. He said that he found all he needed to pull him through. I had also heard others who were attached to certain verses or chapters of the Qur'an - many also for listening to melodious recitations that they had heard for many years.

I have not yet asked Rasool exactly  what attracted him to this chapter, and will never be able to ask the Imam. But I generally let my imagination lead me as I read and reflected on their favorite recitations.

This morning, I decided to share my thoughts on one of the chapters that meant so much to Imam Bassier. It was the the oft-repeated Surah al-A'la. And I focussed on some of its verses (87:6-9):

We shall make thee recite, to forget not save what God wills; surely He knows what is spoken aloud and what is hidden.We shall ease thee unto the Easing.Therefore remind, if the Reminder profits

Ostensibly addressed to the Prophet, the verses have perplexed commentators. They said that the Prophet used to be anxious to repeat quickly what Gabriel conveyed to him, lest he forget. This verse then provide support and confirmation that he would not forget.

But working with the idea of a fixed and definite revelation, these commentators were baffled what to do with a revelation that God wills to be forgotten. I have not read any convincing answers.

In his commentary, Martin Lings has suggested that the verses refer not to the Prophet, but to us normal mortals. He takes the meaning to refer to the flow of knowledge, and how it changes with the advance of time. Knowledge, as we know from modern science, is open to revision and development. But still I was not convinced.

I prefer to stay with the notion of anxiety that the commentators read into these verses. I think that they were right. In relation to revelation, I can imagine that remembering and forgetting might cause a certain anxiety when it is connected to something as weighty as revelation.

Forgetting revelation can be unnerving - especially in Muslim culture which frowns and castigates those of us who have memorized and then forgotten. More generally, we feel threatened by its moral and ethical demands.

Revelation, when elevated to a high level, generates anxiety by its very nature.The Qur'an, as most of us relate to it, unnerves us.

But is this not a metaphor for something deeper on remembering and forgetting. I know from recent neuroscience that both are very important for living a sane life. But what does it mean with regard to revelation?

Perhaps the next verse provides a hint on how to think of revelation and knowledge remembering and forgetting:

surely He knows what is spoken aloud and what is hidden.

If "spoken aloud" stands for that which is remembered, and 'hidden" for that which is forgotten, then we might think differently about remembering and forgetting. We might then backtrack and apply this to remembering and forgetting revelation - whether the Prophet or ordinary people like us.

Can we figure out everything, of the Qur'an and our relation to it - that which is hidden and open? Maybe we should let the flow of remembering and forgetting do its work. Do not try too hard to remember (put everything in the open), sometimes things are better forgotten (hidden). Only God knows both at the same time.

But what does this have to do with Imam Bassier? I remember him as a leader who seemed to have overcome the anxiety that comes with remembering or forgetting. Imam Bassier reminded me of someone who exuded confidence and composure. He let life flow, with him in it. There are people among us who exude this value - do not forget them and keep them hidden.

The Ethics and Aesthetics of Belief and Disbelief

In the last two years, I have had the privilege of sharing some reflections on the Qur'an in a mosque near our home. This weekend (16 July 2017), I decided to share some ideas from a paper that I presented in Morocco recently. I started with trepidation since I know of the gulf that separates an academic talk and a discussion in a mosque. And I remembered Ibn Rushd's (Averroes) apt warning!

Anyway, this is the verse:

Abuse not those to whom they pray, apart from God, or they will abuse God in revenge without knowledge. So We have decked out fair to every nation their deeds; then to their Lord they shall return, and He will tell them what they have been doing (Q 6:108; translation from Arberry)

I asked if anybody in the mosque had heard the first part of the verse. I had the impression that this was a popular verse since it is often quoted by some Muslim scholars when asked about how Muslims should respond to insults heaped upon God or the Prophet Muhammad. None of 15-odd men in the mosque had heard of it. And my audience included a few who were not unaware of the public atmosphere of Islamophobia in recent times in some countries.

So even though I had decided to speak on the second phrase, I had to briefly elaborate on the first part as well. It was a call to set aside the gods from acrimonious human exchange. Insults and abuse should not be directed at the special or sacred (to use the Christian theologian Paul Tillich's definition of religion).  An alert reader or listener might detect a selfish motive behind this advice.

Alternatively, we might think of this as the Golden rule of Jesus' sermon on the mount - but now applied to the sacred that is cherished by those who abuse. But there is still a lingering expectation of mutuality in this rule - which might not take away the tinge or the aroma of selfishness.

Of course, if one thinks that the sacred is an absolute abomination, or alienation (Feuerbach), or neurosis (Freud) or opiate (Marx), then there might be no need to desist from abusing it. This is an idea of the sacred that exists in many circles in the modern world today. The sacred that some people believe in is rejected in its totality. In this case, the golden rule, if applied, would be to the human person but excluding what he or she may treasure and cherish.

Let me return to the second part of the verse which I wanted to focus on in my talk; and which I think sheds sheds some light on the first part.

So We have decked out fair to every nation their deeds.

This part of the verse has not been as extensively cited or discussed in recent dialogical exchanges over religion and mutual abuse. I have not heard anybody who cites the first part of the verse elaborate on the second part. And I did not expect anybody in the mosque to have heard of it. And this time, I was correct in my assumption.

There is a long history of commentary on this phrase. I submit that the the phrase points to the close relation between truth and beauty. It reminds listeners and readers that the sacred, truth and values,  including the ultimate decision of  believing or disbelieving, is founded on appearance. More than mere appearance, truth is rooted and founded on an aesthetic (a judgment of beauty and form). And that aesthetic is the basis on which beliefs, judgments and values are held. Beauty and truth are held in a tight embrace.

But there is a sting in the tail. An aesthetic judgement might be misleading or open the road to felicity. Beauty comes with truth, but does not guarantee it.

And more interestingly, for this reading that I am suggesting, the verse asks believers to recognize this adornment in the belief held by those who insult God. That might be a tall order which will be difficult for most. Recognizing the difficulty of fully appreciating that another person sees beauty where one only sees error and falsehood, I think that the verse takes on a 2-stage ethical reflection.

I would suggest that in the first part of the verse, we are asked to stop the cycle of insults. Someone has to stop - and it would be good to be that person.

Then, the second part of the verse ventures a more difficult ethical stance. Here, we are told that the foundation of a person's belief who insults your God lies in an aesthetic judgment made by the person who holds that belief. The aesthetic and moral judgment is not merely rooted in arrogance, stupidity or laziness, but on what the other truly thinks is beautiful.

The delicacy of belief and aesthetic is captured by the Adalusian exegete al-Qurtubi's reference to a rhetorical of prayer of Umar (the second caliph of Islam) in his reflection of another verse in the Qur'an that repeats this theme of aesthetics and truth. Reportedly, Umar turned to God and asked: “What will you make beautiful for us?” This question, I propose, exposes the precariousness of moral judgment. It locates moral judgment on aesthetics, which is necessary and inevitable. But that judgment is possibly misleading. So Umar (ra) asks God what He will make beautiful for him (hoping and trusting that it will be the good). 

I submit that this verse might be a good foundation for thinking about unbelief in a deeply respectful way.